9/24/01 - from WGEN - Did you happen to catch the Senate Government Affairs Committee hearing on homeland security last Friday?  While most television viewers watched a
charity music concert, C-SPAN showed U.S. government officials seriously
discussing whether to allow the military to run the country if more
serious terrorist attacks occur.

Each of the men who testified at the hearing was associated with one of
the multi-year special government committees recently issuing reports on
terrorism.  Although all those testifying favored threat assessment and
prevention, they differed on how much of the government should be
permanently reorganized, and during the last half hour they clearly
disagreed about whether the Department of Defense should be the lead
agency if future attacks occur.

Here is official C-SPAN information on the hearing:

    Senate Committee
    Responding to Homeland Threats
    Governmental Affairs
    Washington, District of Columbia (United States)
    ID: 166206 - 09/21/2001 - 2:06 - $150.00

    Hart, Gary, Co-Chair, U.S. Commission on Natl. Security for 21st
    Century (2001-)
    Rudman, Warren B., Member, Sharm el-Sheikh Fact-Finding Cmsn., Middle
    East (2001-)
    Lieberman, Joseph, U.S. Senator, D-CT (1989-)
    Walker, David M., Comptroller General, General Accounting Office
    (1999-)
    Gilmore, James, Governor, R-VA (1998-)

    Witnesses will testify regarding the adequacy of federal government
    plan to respond to threats to the United States homeland.

            Copyright © 2001 National Cable Satellite Corporation
      _________________________________________________________________

Besides those mentioned above, committee chair Joseph Lieberman also heard
from L. Paul Bremer III, former Ambassador-At-Large for Counter-Terrorism.
He was the strongest advocate for allowing the Department of Defense to
become the lead agency in times of large-scale terrorist activity.
Excerpts from his committee's report follow; note particularly the starred
sections.  (Governor James Gilmore of Virginia was, naturally, the least
eager to replace state government with military rule and pointed out that
the National Guard assisting in NYC had been activated by the Governor of
New York.)


www.fas.org/irp/threat/commission.html

                                   [INLINE]

                                COUNTERING THE
                               CHANGING THREAT
                               OF INTERNATIONAL
                                  TERRORISM

                Report of the National Commission on Terrorism

                  Pursuant to Public Law 277, 105th Congress
        ______________________________________________________________

      [...]

                            PREPARE TO PREVENT OR
                           RESPOND TO CATASTROPHIC
                              TERRORIST ATTACKS

      A terrorist attack in the United States using a biological agent,
      deadly chemicals, or nuclear or radiological material, even if only
      partially successful, would profoundly affect the entire nation, as
      would a series of conventional attacks or a single bombing that
      caused thousands of deaths. Given the trend toward more deadly
      terrorist attacks and indications that mass casualties are an
      objective of many of today's terrorists, it is essential that
      America be fully prepared to prevent and respond to this kind of
      catastrophic terrorism.

      Over the past few years, the U.S. Government has taken a number of
      positive steps. Several Presidential Directives have effected major
      changes in organizational responsibilities and improved
      cooperation. The Department of Health and Human Services' Strategic
      Plan, the Attorney General's Five-Year Plan, the establishment of a
      military Joint Task Force for Civil Support, and improvement in
      first responders' capabilities are valuable efforts, but there is
      still more to do.

      There is a risk that, in preventing or responding to a catastrophic
      terrorist attack, officials may hesitate or act improperly because
      they do not fully understand their legal authority or because there
      are gaps in that authority.

      There is some statutory authority that does not now exist that
      should be considered for catastrophic conditions. For example:

      * Federal quarantine authority cannot be used in a situation that is
        confined to a single state.
      * Not all cities or states have their own quarantine authority.
      * There is no clear federal authority with regard to compelling
        vaccinations, or rationing scarce vaccinations, or requiring
        autopsies when necessary for a terrorism investigation.

      The Constitution permits extraordinary measures in the face of
      extraordinary threats. To prevent or respond to catastrophic
      terrorism, law enforcement and public health officials have the
      authority to conduct investigations and implement measures that
      temporarily exceed measures applicable under non-emergency
      conditions. These may include cordoning off of areas, vehicle
      searches, certain medical measures, and sweep searches through
      areas believed to contain weapons or terrorists.

      Determining whether a particular measure is reasonable requires
      balancing privacy and other rights against the public interest in
      coping with a terrorist threat which may lead to massive
      casualties. Advance preparation is the best way to deal
      successfully with a terrorist incident without jeopardizing
      individuals' Constitutional rights.

    Recommendations:
           + The President should direct the preparation of a manual on
             the implementation of existing legal authority necessary to
             address effectively a catastrophic terrorist threat or
             attack. The manual should be distributed to the appropriate
             federal, state, and local officials and be used in training,
             exercises, and educational programs.
           + The President should determine whether any additional legal
             authority is needed to deal with catastrophic terrorism and
             make recommendations to Congress if necessary.

**   The U.S. Government's plans for a catastrophic terrorist attack on
      the United States do not employ the full range of the Department of
      Defense's (DoD's) capabilities for managing large operations.
      Additionally, the interagency coordination and cooperation required
      to integrate the DoD properly into counterterrorism planning has
      not been accomplished.

      The Department of Defense's ability to command and control vast
      resources for dangerous, unstructured situations is unmatched by
      any other department or agency. According to current plans, DoD
      involvement is limited to supporting the agencies that are
      currently designated as having the lead in a terrorism crisis, the
      FBI and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). But, in
      extraordinary circumstances, when a catastrophe is beyond the
      capabilities of local, state, and other federal agencies, or is
      directly related to an armed conflict overseas, the President may
      want to designate DoD as a lead federal agency. This may become a
      critical operational consideration in planning for future
      conflicts. Current plans and exercises do not consider this
      possibility.

    [7]Graphic: "Lead Federal Agencies (LFA) For Terrorist Attacks"

**   An expanded role for the DoD in a catastrophic terrorist attack
      will have policy and legal implications. Other federal agencies,
      the states, and local communities will have major concerns. In
      preparing for such a contingency, there will also be internal DoD
      issues on resources and possible conflicts with traditional
      military contingency plans. These issues should be addressed
      beforehand.

      Effective preparation also requires effective organization. The DoD
      is not optimally organized to respond to the wide range of missions
      that would likely arise from the threat of a catastrophic terrorist
      attack. For example, within DoD several offices, departments,
      Unified Commands, the Army, and the National Guard have overlapping
      responsibilities to plan and execute operations in case of a
      catastrophic terrorist attack. These operations will require an
      unprecedented degree of interagency coordination and communication
      in order to be successful.

    [8]Graphic: DOD Components with Relevant Responsibilities

      There are neither plans for the DoD to assume a lead agency role
      nor exercises rehearsing this capability. Hence, these demanding
      tasks would have to be accomplished on an ad hoc basis by the
      military.

    Recommendations:
**        + The President should direct the Assistant to the President
             for National Security Affairs, in coordination with the
             Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General, to develop and
             adopt detailed contingency plans that would transfer lead
             federal agency authority to the Department of Defense if
             necessary during a catastrophic terrorist attack or prior to
             an imminent attack.
           + The Secretary of Defense should establish a unified command
             structure that would integrate all catastrophic terrorism
             capabilities and conduct detailed planning and exercises with
             relevant federal, state, and local authorities.

      The interagency program and plan for exercising the government's
      preparedness to respond to a catastrophic terrorist attack is
      inadequate.

      In addition to DoD exercises, a realistic interagency exercise
      program,with full participation by all relevant federal agencies
      and their leaders, is essential for national preparedness to
      counter a catastrophic terrorist attack. In June 1995, the
      President established an interagency counterterrorist Exercise
      Subgroup and program which included preparation for a catastrophic
      terrorist attack. However, not all federal agencies have
      participated in or budgeted for these exercises.

      Additionally, in September 1998, Congress funded and mandated the
      Department of Justice and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
      to conduct a counterterrorism and consequence management exercise,
      called TOPOFF, involving relevant federal agencies and their senior
      leadership, with select state and local governments participating,
      to evaluate the U.S. Government's preparedness for a catastrophic
      terrorist incident. However, sufficient funding was not provided
      and there is no requirement to exercise on a regular schedule.

    Recommendation:
           + The President should direct (1) the Exercise Subgroup, under
             the direction of the national coordinator for
             counterterrorism, to exercise annually the government's
             response to a catastrophic terrorism crisis, including
             consequence management; and (2) all relevant federal agencies
             to plan, budget and participate in counterterrorism and
             consequence management exercises coordinated by the Exercise
             Subgroup and ensure senior officer level participation,
             particularly in the annual exercises.
[...]

        ______________________________________________________________

                  APPENDIX B: COMMISSION CHARTER AND PROCESS

      Commission History

      The National Commission on Terrorism was established by Section
      591of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related
      Programs Appropriation Act, 1999 (as contained in the Omnibus
      Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999
      (P.L. 105-277). The legislation called for the appointment of 10
      commissioners, three selected by the Majority Leader of the Senate,
      three by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and two each
      by the Minority Leaders of the Senate and House of Representatives.

      Congress gave the Commission six months to review the laws,
      regulations, directives, policies and practices for preventing and
      punishing international terrorism directed against the United
      States, assess their effectiveness, and recommend changes. The
      Commission held 14 plenary meetings, generally meeting twice per
      month. During its meetings, the Commission was briefed by both
      government witnesses and outside experts. A number of Commissioners
      met with representatives of the governments of Canada, Egypt,
      France, Israel, Jordan, Poland, and the United Kingdom to address
      various international terrorism issues, including cooperation
      between those countries and the United States. Several
      Commissioners participated in non-plenary meetings dealing with
      particular issues, and Commission staff interviewed additional
      witnesses. (See List of Witnesses at Appendix D)

      Charter Legislation

      PUBLIC LAW 105-277 - OCT 21, 1998
      (Page 112 STAT. 2681-210; H.R. 4328)

    [law is cited]
    ______________________________________________________________

                   APPENDIX C: COMMISSION MEMBERS AND STAFF

      Commissioners

      L. Paul Bremer III, Chairman is the Managing Director of Kissinger
      Associates. During a 23-year career in the American diplomatic
      service, Ambassador Bremer served in Asia, Africa, Europe and
      Washington, D.C. He was Ambassador to the Netherlands from 1983 to
      1986. From 1986-1989, he served as Ambassador-at-Large for
      Counter-Terrorism, where he was responsible for developing and
      implementing America's global polices to combat terrorism.

      Maurice Sonnenberg, Vice Chairman, is the senior international
      advisor to the investment banking firm of Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc.
      and the senior international advisor to the law firm of Manatt,
      Phelps & Phillips, LLP. He is a member of the President's Foreign
      Intelligence Advisory Board. He recently served as a member of the
      U.S. Commission on Reducing and Protecting Government Secrecy and
      as the senior advisor to the U.S. Commission on the Roles and
      Capabilities of the U.S. Intelligence Community.

      [...]


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]